DOCSLIB.ORG

Renewal Primer for Television Stations for Renewal Cycle Beginning June 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Renewal Primer for Television Stations for Renewal Cycle Beginning June 2020 Renewal Primer for Television Stations for Renewal Cycle Beginning June 2020 March 2020 This primer provides detailed guidance on the television station license renewal process.1 Please have those involved in the license renewal process at your station take some time to review these materials. Stations must begin their post-filing announcements on the date that their renewal application is filed. Note that we are happy to set up a call with our clients to walk through this process and answer any questions. We are also glad to handle the mechanics of filing renewal applications through the FCC’s “new” Licensing Management System (“LMS”). SECTION I: THE BASICS The deadline by which a station is required to file its license renewal application is determined by the state in which the station is licensed. Attachment A contains a state-by-state list of license renewal application filing dates and license expiration dates.2 After filing its license renewal application, a station must air post-filing announcements for one month.3 Pre-filing announcements are no longer required.4 Section II of this memorandum provides detailed guidance on the required post-filing announcements, the specific text required, and sample statements for certifying compliance with the public announcement requirements (Attachments B-E). The license renewal application must be filed electronically through the FCC’s Licensing Management System (LMS) platform using FCC Form 2100/Schedule 303-S (“Form 303-S”). A sample copy of the Form 303-S from LMS is available at Attachment F, along with the FCC’s instructions for the form. The Form 303-S is presented in primarily a “Yes/No” format, and requires licensees to certify as to their compliance with certain FCC regulatory requirements during the preceding eight-year license term. For stations purchased in the midst of the preceding license term, your certifications only cover the period for which you held the license. Section III of this memorandum provides a brief summary of each certification required by the Form 303-S. When completing the application, only certify “Yes” to a question where you are 1 Additional information can be found on the FCC’s website at https://www.fcc.gov/media/television/broadcast-television-license-renewal. 2 Note that if the first day of the month falls on a weekend or federal holiday, the license renewal application will be due on the next full business day. 3 Media Bureau Announces Effective Date of New Local Public Notice Rules, Public Notice, DA 20-1289 (rel. October 30, 2020); Amendment of Section 73.3580 of the Commission’s Rules Regarding Public Notice of the Filing of Applications, Second Report and Order, FCC 20-65 (2020). 4 Pre-Filing Announcement Requirements 2020-2023 Renewal Applications, Order, DA 20-511 (rel. May 13, 2020). certain that you have fully complied with the FCC’s rules and policies. Otherwise, answer “No” and provide an explanatory exhibit. Note that a “No” response does not automatically preclude grant of your application. The Commission realizes that, over an eight-year span, licensees may make errors. Although a “No” certification may result in a fine, the penalty for a false certification is far greater. The agency has fined broadcasters thousands of dollars for making inaccurate certifications. While addressed in only one certification, the “Local Public File” question in the renewal application, which includes the online political file, requires particular attention. Section IV of this memorandum provides detailed guidance on the steps a station should take to ensure that its online public inspection file is complete and that this question is answered accurately. Finally, in conjunction with the license renewal application, all stations (regardless of the number of full-time employees employed) must file a Broadcast Equal Employment Opportunity Program Report in LMS using FCC Form 2100/Schedule 396 (“Form 396”). A Form 396 as it appears in LMS is available at Attachment I. Because of the mechanics of the FCC’s filing system, the Form 396 must be filed in advance of the license renewal application. After the Form 396 is submitted, LMS will generate a file number for the Form 396 that must then be included in the Form 303-S before the renewal application can be submitted. Section VI of this memorandum provides detailed guidance on how to complete the Form 396. SECTION II: PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS/NOTICES5 Full-Power Television Stations, Class A Television Stations, and Low Power Television Stations Originating Local Programming Post-Filing Announcements After your license renewal application is filed, you must broadcast notice of the filing a total of six times – at least once per week for four consecutive weeks, with no more than two announcements per week, beginning no later than five business days following the release of the Commission public notice announcement of the acceptance of the application for filing. All on-air announcements must be broadcast between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. local time. Attachment B contains the FCC’s mandatory post-filing announcement text for full-power television stations and Class A television stations. Attachment C contains mandatory post- filing announcement text for low power television stations. We can assist you with filling in the blanks prior to the date your announcements must begin. Stations broadcasting primarily in a foreign language should broadcast the announcements in that language. In addition, stations must use visuals with the licensee’s and the FCC’s addresses when post-filing information is being orally presented by the announcer. Certification Within seven days of broadcasting the last post-filing announcement, full-power and Class A television stations must upload a statement certifying compliance with the public announcement requirement to the station’s online public inspection file. The statement must set forth the dates 5 The requirements discussed in this section are found in Section 73.3580 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. § 73.3580. and times that the post-filing notices were broadcast and provide the texts of the announcements. The certification does not need to include the announcement texts. Attachment D contains a sample certification. TV Translators and LPTV Stations Not Originating Local Programming Newspaper Notice Low power television stations not originating local programming and television translators are not required to broadcast post-filing announcements. Instead, the public notice requirements for such stations are as follows: • Under the Commission’s new online public notice rule, low power television stations that do not originate local programming are no longer required to publish a post-filing announcement in a local newspaper. Instead, they must make the post-filing announcement available online. The notice should be posted in order of availability, on (1) the website of the applicant station, (2) the website of the applicant station’s licensee, or (3) the website of the applicant station’s parent entity. If there is no applicant-affiliated website, then see below for further instructions. For a station or affiliated website, the station must insert a tab or link on the website homepage labeled, “FCC Applications” that will link to a separate page containing the text of the notice. If the station has no pending applications, then the webpage should note this. Moreover, the webpage should contain a timestamp that reflects when the page was last updated. Attachment E contains the recommended text for this notice. If there is no applicant-affiliated website, then the notice must be published on a locally targeted, publicly accessible website, which the Commission defines as a website that (a) members of the public can access without payment, registration, or any other requirement that the user provide information or respond to a survey or questionnaire in exchange for being able to access the online notice, and (b) is locally targeted to the area served and/or to be served by the applicant station (e.g., local government website, local community bulletin board website, local newspaper website, state broadcasters’ association website).6. • If a television translator station is not renewed with the primary station7 that it rebroadcasts, then that station must similarly publish an online post-filing announcement. Attachment E contains the recommended text for this notice. Television translator stations that are renewed on the same Form 303-S as the primary station being rebroadcast do not need to compose a post-filing announcement. 6 Online Notice Order, FCC 20-65 at ¶ 12. 7 Television translators may only be renewed on the same application form as the primary station it rebroadcasts when they are commonly owned and either (1) they are licensed in the same state as the primary station or (2) they are licensed in a state that has the same TV license expiration date as the primary station. Translators located in separate states from the primary station that is being rebroadcasted may not file on the same Form 303-S as the primary station if the translator has an earlier or later license expiration date. SECTION III: LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION CERTIFICATIONS The certifications in the Form 303-S pertain to the licensee (e.g., the applicant) and “any party to the application.”8 Each certification in the renewal application is summarized below. Character Issues.9 This certification asks the licensee to confirm that: • “Neither the licensee nor any party to the application has or has had any interest in, or connection with, any broadcast application in any proceeding where character issues were left unresolved, or were resolved adversely against the applicant or any party to the application”; and • “Neither the licensee nor any party to the application has or has had any interest in, or connection with, any pending broadcast application in which character issues have been raised.” These certifications are phrased in the negative; if the licensee has nothing to report, it would answer “Yes” to both questions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Producer's Handbook
    DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER CHALLENGES A PRODUCER’S HANDBOOK by Kathy Avrich-Johnson Edited by Daphne Park Rehdner Summer 2002 Introduction and Disclaimer This handbook addresses business issues and considerations related to certain aspects of the production process, namely development and the acquisition of rights, producer relationships and low budget production. There is no neat title that encompasses these topics but what ties them together is that they are all areas that present particular challenges to emerging producers. In the course of researching this book, the issues that came up repeatedly are those that arise at the earlier stages of the production process or at the earlier stages of the producer’s career. If not properly addressed these will be certain to bite you in the end. There is more discussion of various considerations than in Canadian Production Finance: A Producer’s Handbook due to the nature of the topics. I have sought not to replicate any of the material covered in that book. What I have sought to provide is practical guidance through some tricky territory. There are often as many different agreements and approaches to many of the topics discussed as there are producers and no two productions are the same. The content of this handbook is designed for informational purposes only. It is by no means a comprehensive statement of available options, information, resources or alternatives related to Canadian development and production. The content does not purport to provide legal or accounting advice and must not be construed as doing so. The information contained in this handbook is not intended to substitute for informed, specific professional advice.
    [Show full text]
  • Fcc 302-Fm Application for Fm Broadcast Station License
    CDBS Print Page 1 of 7 Federal Communications Commission Approved by OMB FOR FCC USE ONLY Washington, D.C. 20554 3060-0506 (June 2002) FCC 302-FM FOR COMMISSION USE ONLY APPLICATION FOR FM BROADCAST STATION FILE NO. LICENSE BXLED - 20081113AET Read INSTRUCTIONS Before Filling Out Form Section I - General Information 1. Legal Name of the Applicant PASADENA AREA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT Mailing Address 1570 E. COLORADO BLVD. City State or Country (if foreign address) ZIP Code PASADENA CA 91106 - Telephone Number (include area code) E-Mail Address (if available) 6265857201 [email protected] FCC Registration Number: Call Sign Facility Identifier 0005085204 KPCC 51701 2. Contact Representative (if other than Applicant) Firm or Company Name JOHN CRIGLER GARVEY SCHUBERT & BARER Telephone Number (include area code) E-Mail Address (if available) 2022982521 [email protected] 3. If this application has been submitted without a fee, indicate reason for fee exemption (see 47 C.F.R. Section 1.1114): Governmental Entity Noncommercial Educational Licensee/Permittee Other N/A (Fee Required) 4. Facility Information: a. Commercial Noncommercial b. Directional Nondirectional c. Community of License: City: PASADENA State: CA 5. Program Test Authority: Requesting program test authority. Station operating pursuant to automatic program test authority (47 C.F.R. Section 73.1620(a)(1)). 6. Purpose of Application: Cover construction permit (list most recent construction permit file number -- starts with the BXPED- prefix BPH, BNPH, BMPH, BPED, BMPED, or BMPED): 20080923ABK Modify an authorized license (list license file number -- starts with the prefix BLH, BMLH, - BLED, or BMLED): Amend a pending application If an amendment, submit as an Exhibit a listing by Section and Question Number the portions of the pending application that are being revised.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: the Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation
    Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 49 Issue 3 Article 2 4-1997 Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation Ellen P. Goodman Covington & Burling Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj Part of the Communications Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Goodman, Ellen P. (1997) "Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 49 : Iss. 3 , Article 2. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj/vol49/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Federal Communications Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation Ellen P. Goodman* I. INTRODUCTION ................................... 517 II. ORIGINS OF THE DTV PRovIsIoNs OF THE 1996 ACT .... 519 A. The Regulatory Process ..................... 519 B. The FirstBills ............................ 525 1. The Commerce Committee Bills ............. 526 2. Budget Actions ......................... 533 C. The Passage of the 1996Act .................. 537 Ill. THE AFTERMATH OF THE 1996 ACT ................ 538 A. Setting the Stage .......................... 538 B. The CongressionalHearings .................. 542 IV. CONCLUSION ................................ 546 I. INTRODUCTION President Clinton signed into law the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act or the Act) on February 8, 1996.1 The pen he used to sign the Act was also used by President Eisenhower to create the federal highway system in 1957 and was later given to Senator Albert Gore, Sr., the father of the highway legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • Competition in Local Broadcast Television Advertising Markets Kevin Caves and Hal Singer August 4, 2014
    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) 2014 Quadrennial Regulatory Review – Review ) MB Docket No. 14-50 of the Commission’s Broadcast Ownership Rules ) and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section ) 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) ) 2010 Quadrennial Regulatory Review – Review ) MB Docket No. 09-182 of the Commission’s Broadcast Ownership Rules ) and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section ) 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) ) Promoting Diversification of Ownership ) MB Docket No. 07-294 in the Broadcasting Services ) ) Rules and Policies Concerning ) MB Docket No. 04-256 Attribution of Joint Sales Agreements ) in Local Television Markets ) ) Competition in Local Broadcast Television Advertising Markets Kevin Caves and Hal Singer August 4, 2014 -2- Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 I. Background ......................................................................................................................... 4 A. The DOJ Asserts That Local Broadcast Television Advertising Is a Relevant Antitrust Product Market ........................................................................................ 4 B. The DOJ’s Position Lacks Empirical Support ........................................................ 5 II. Empirical Evidence Is Inconsistent with the DOJ’s Definition of the Relevant Product Market ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ed Phelps Logs His 1,000 DTV Station Using Just Himself and His DTV Box. No Autologger Needed
    The Magazine for TV and FM DXers October 2020 The Official Publication of the Worldwide TV-FM DX Association Being in the right place at just the right time… WKMJ RF 34 Ed Phelps logs his 1,000th DTV Station using just himself and his DTV Box. No autologger needed. THE VHF-UHF DIGEST The Worldwide TV-FM DX Association Serving the TV, FM, 30-50mhz Utility and Weather Radio DXer since 1968 THE VHF-UHF DIGEST IS THE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE WORLDWIDE TV-FM DX ASSOCIATION DEDICATED TO THE OBSERVATION AND STUDY OF THE PROPAGATION OF LONG DISTANCE TELEVISION AND FM BROADCASTING SIGNALS AT VHF AND UHF. WTFDA IS GOVERNED BY A BOARD OF DIRECTORS: DOUG SMITH, SAUL CHERNOS, KEITH MCGINNIS, JAMES THOMAS AND MIKE BUGAJ Treasurer: Keith McGinnis wtfda.org/info Webmaster: Tim McVey Forum Site Administrator: Chris Cervantez Creative Director: Saul Chernos Editorial Staff: Jeff Kruszka, Keith McGinnis, Fred Nordquist, Nick Langan, Doug Smith, John Zondlo and Mike Bugaj The WTFDA Board of Directors Doug Smith Saul Chernos James Thomas Keith McGinnis Mike Bugaj [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Renewals by mail: Send to WTFDA, P.O. Box 501, Somersville, CT 06072. Check or MO for $10 payable to WTFDA. Renewals by Paypal: Send your dues ($10USD) from the Paypal website to [email protected] or go to https://www.paypal.me/WTFDA and type 10.00 or 20.00 for two years in the box. Our WTFDA.org website webmaster is Tim McVey, [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • SAGA COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter)
    2016 Annual Report 2016 Annual Letter To our fellow shareholders: Well…. here we go. This letter is supposed to be my turn to tell you about Saga, but this year is a little different because it involves other people telling you about Saga. The following is a letter sent to the staff at WNOR FM 99 in Norfolk, Virginia. Directly or indirectly, I have been a part of this station for 35+ years. Let me continue this train of thought for a moment or two longer. Saga, through its stockholders, owns WHMP AM and WRSI FM in Northampton, Massachusetts. Let me share an experience that recently occurred there. Our General Manager, Dave Musante, learned about a local grocery/deli called Serio’s that has operated in Northampton for over 70 years. The 3rd generation matriarch had passed over a year ago and her son and daughter were having some difficulties with the store. Dave’s staff came up with the idea of a ‘‘cash mob’’ and went on the air asking people in the community to go to Serio’s from 3 to 5PM on Wednesday and ‘‘buy something.’’ That’s it. Zero dollars to our station. It wasn’t for our benefit. Community outpouring was ‘‘just overwhelming and inspiring’’ and the owner was emotionally overwhelmed by the community outreach. As Dave Musante said in his letter to me, ‘‘It was the right thing to do.’’ Even the local newspaper (and local newspapers never recognize radio) made the story front page above the fold. Permit me to do one or two more examples and then we will get down to business.
    [Show full text]
  • Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected]
    University of Miami Law School University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository Articles Faculty and Deans 1996 Not With a Bang But a Whimper: Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/fac_articles Part of the Communications Law Commons Recommended Citation Lili Levi, Not With a Bang But a Whimper: Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 29 Conn. L. Rev. 243 (1996). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty and Deans at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Not With a Bang But a Whimper: Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Liu LEvi In 1969, public outrage derailed a bill providing that the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC" or "Commission") could not con- sider competing applications for broadcast licenses unless it first found that renewal of the incumbent's license would not be in the public interest.' Citizen groups claimed that eliminating comparative challenges to incumbent broadcasters was "back-door racism" and reinforced the under-representation of minorities in broadcasting.2 They decried the bill as a "vicious ... attempt to limit the efforts of the black community to challenge the prevailing racist practices of the vast majority of TV stations."3 When the FCC thereupon issued a policy statement adopting a similar reform of the comparative renewal process, it was reversed by * Professor of Law, University of Miami School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Television and Media Concentration
    •• IRIS Special Edited by the European Audiovisual Observatory TelevisionTelevision andand MediaMedia ConcentrationConcentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level TELEVISION AND MEDIA CONCENTRATION IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2001 ISBN 92-871-4595-4 Director of the Publication: Wolfgang Closs, Executive Director of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Editor and Coordinator: Dr. Susanne Nikoltchev (LL.M. EUI and U of M) Legal Expert of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Partner Organisations that contributed to IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration IViR – Institute of European Media Law EMR – Institute of European Media Law Rokin 84, NL-1012 KX Amsterdam Nell-Breuning-Allee 6, D-66115 Saarbrücken Tel.: +31 (0) 20 525 34 06 Tel.: +49 (0) 681 99275 11 Fax: +31 (0) 20 525 30 33 Fax: +49 (0) 681 99275 12 E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] CMC – Communications Media Center MMLPC – Moscow Media Law and Policy Center New York Law School Mokhovaya 9, 103914 Moscow 57 Worth Street, New York, NY 10013 Russian Federation USA Tel./Fax: +7 (0) 503 737 3371 Tel.: +1 212 431 2160 E-Mail: [email protected] Fax: +1 212 966 2053 [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] Proofreaders: Florence Pastori, Géraldine Pilard-Murray, Candelaria van Strien-Reney Translators: Brigitte Auel, France Courrèges, Christopher
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-8 Before the Federal
    Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-8 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) ) Second Periodic Review of the ) MB Docket No. 03-15 Commission’s Rules and Policies ) Affecting the Conversion ) RM 9832 To Digital Television ) ) Public Interest Obligations of TV ) MM Docket No. 99-360 Broadcast Licensees ) ) Children’s Television Obligations of ) MM Docket No. 00-167 Digital Television Broadcasters ) ) Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure ) MM Docket No. 00-168 Requirements for Television Broadcast Licensee ) Public Interest Obligations ) NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING Adopted: January 15, 2003 Released: January 27, 2003 Comment date: April 14, 2003 Reply Comment date: May 14, 2003 By the Commission: Commissioners Copps and Adelstein issuing separate statements. TABLE OF CONTENTS Paragraph I. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………. 1 II. BACKGROUND …………………………………………………………………………... 2 III. PROGRESS REPORT ……………………………………………………………………... 7 IV. ISSUE ANALYSIS ………………………………………………………………………… 18 A. Transition Progress in Specific Areas …………………………………………………. 18 B. Channel Election ……………………………………………………………………… 24 C. Replication and Maximization for In-Core Channels ………………………………… 29 D. Interference Protection of Analog and Digital Television Service in TV Channels 51-69 39 1. Background ……………………………………………………………………… 41 2. Definition of “Actual” Broadcast Parameters Under Sections 90.545(c)(1)(ii) and 27.60(b)(1)(iii) …………………………………………………………………... 49 3. Replication ………………………………………………………………………. 52 4. Maximization
    [Show full text]
  • FCC's $10000 Fines Against College Radio Stations
    TOPIC: FCC’S $10,000 FINES AGAINST COLLEGE RADIO STATIONS: PLAYING BAD RECORDS MAY BE LEGAL; KEEPING BAD RECORDS IS NOT INTRODUCTION: Many colleges and universities have student-run noncommercial educational radio broadcast stations. These stations are subject to licensing and regulation by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”). [1] Recent FCC enforcement actions make clear that a broadcaster’s status as a college or “student” station does not excuse (or mitigate) the station’s failure to comply with FCC rules and regulations. In particular, the FCC has been rigorously enforcing its public inspection file rules (discussed in section II below), imposing base forfeitures of $10,000 on college and university radio station license-holders for failing to maintain required documentation in the stations’ public files. The FCC’s “get tough” enforcement policies underscore the need for appropriate institutional oversight of college radio stations. For colleges and universities whose stations are not in compliance with FCC regulations, the most likely sanctions are monetary fines or forfeitures, but other possible, more severe sanctions include special reporting conditions, short-term license renewal, and in the very extreme (and very rare) case, possible loss of the station’s valuable FCC license. DISCUSSION: I. Bygone Days Broadcasting is a heavily regulated industry with the FCC exercising broad powers pursuant to the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. In bygone times, perhaps in recognition of the training function of college radio, the FCC accorded college stations some leeway with regulatory compliance, particularly for regulatory omissions that were relatively minor and inadvertent. Over the past decade, however, FCC enforcement has become much stricter.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Tv Stations
    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) MB Docket No. 17- WSBS Licensing, Inc. ) ) ) CSR No. For Modification of the Television Market ) For WSBS-TV, Key West, Florida ) Facility ID No. 72053 To: Office of the Secretary Attn.: Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF WSBS LICENSING, INC. SPANISH BROADCASTING SYSTEM, INC. Nancy A. Ory Paul A. Cicelski Laura M. Berman Lerman Senter PLLC 2001 L Street NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 Tel. (202) 429-8970 April 19, 2017 Their Attorneys -ii- SUMMARY In this Petition, WSBS Licensing, Inc. and its parent company Spanish Broadcasting System, Inc. (“SBS”) seek modification of the television market of WSBS-TV, Key West, Florida (the “Station”), to reinstate 41 communities (the “Communities”) located in the Miami- Ft. Lauderdale Designated Market Area (the “Miami-Ft. Lauderdale DMA” or the “DMA”) that were previously deleted from the Station’s television market by virtue of a series of market modification decisions released in 1996 and 1997. SBS seeks recognition that the Communities located in Miami-Dade and Broward Counties form an integral part of WSBS-TV’s natural market. The elimination of the Communities prior to SBS’s ownership of the Station cannot diminish WSBS-TV’s longstanding service to the Communities, to which WSBS-TV provides significant locally-produced news and public affairs programming targeted to residents of the Communities, and where the Station has developed many substantial advertising relationships with local businesses throughout the Communities within the Miami-Ft. Lauderdale DMA. Cable operators have obviously long recognized that a clear nexus exists between the Communities and WSBS-TV’s programming because they have been voluntarily carrying WSBS-TV continuously for at least a decade and continue to carry the Station today.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 064 904 EM 009 994 TITLE Educational Radio. INSTITUTION Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. REPORT NO R-21-B PUB DATE 72 NOTE 20p. EDRS PRICE MF-$0.65 HC-$3.29 DESCRIPTORS Agency Role; *Broadcast Industry; *Educational Radio; Government Publications; *Programing (Broadcast); *Radio; *Radio Technology IDENTIFIERS Federal Communications Commission ABSTRACT Aspects of educational radio covered in this bulletin include a brief history, federal rules and regulations pertaining to it, application procedures, networks and sources of programing, sources of funding, and organizations and government agencies with an interest in educational radio. Griq F- F (E-7v) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED Educational EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECES. SARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDU- CATION POSITION OR POLICY Radio 21-B 1/72 Educational institutions were among GENER4 the pioneers in the development of radio broadcasting. WHA, licensed to the University of Wisconsin in Madison, began experimental operation in 1919 as station 9XM. Its present call letters were assigned on January 13, 1922. By 1925, there were 171 educational organizations with stationson the air, b4 for various reasons most of these stations eventually ceased operation. FM broadcasting was authorized in 1941, and the number of educational stations on the air grew rapidly following the end of World War II. At the beginning of 1972,more than 500 educational radio stations were licensed, about 40 percent of them having gone on the air in the previous five years.
    [Show full text]